I'm sure that almost every member of Congress can point to some good things that they have accomplished for their constituents. That doesn't change the fact that they've been spending money at an insane rate, money that we don't have. Senator Feingold is, indeed, part of the problem.

Oh, come on now. The ad is effective because it resonates with things we know and have internalized over the years. I'm not saying the ad will make me vote for him, only that the ad prompts me to remember things about Russ Feingold that I like and respect.

Sure, Russ. No doubt that you're the only Senator working for the Veterans. Duro Bag of Hudson, WI., is closing the plant down, and moving operations to some other plant in a different state. Polaris of Osceola, WI., will be all gone in less than two years. 500 jobs, poof! Well, at least you'll get the Professor's vote.

Perhaps those of you who instinctively make anti-female statements and assume I act directly on pure emotion are yourselves in automatic mode. Look to yourself? Your reaction to me doesn't look terribly contemplative and deeply reasoned.

I didn't like this "Garage Door" ad when I first saw it because it reminds the viewer how long he's been in office.

On a second view, I found the ad somewhat endearing. Here's why.

Shortly after Feingold won his first Senate election, our family was shopping at Hilldale Mall. Feingold was sitting on one of the benches in the indoor atrium, near where the University Bookstore stood. Mr. Irene walked up to him and congratulated him. Mr. Irene then explained to my mother that Mr. Feingold had just been elected to seat in the Senate. My mother leaned over the sitting Feingold and rubbed his head, saying, "Such a nice boy." Feingold looked up at her with a charming, smile, and said, "Thank you, Ma'am."

Aw, Poor Russ. Votes for everything that his Party leaders tell him to, but he's just so darned independent they can't stand to eat lunch with him. Senator, maybe if you didn't believe in fairy tales like Global Warming,universal healthcare at no cost and effective diplomacy through apology, then you and your Party wouldn't be so marginalized. Sadly, there may be enough Wisconsins who share Althouse's emotional reaction to the ad. Much to the campaign's credit, they know who to target.

This ad reaches the part of me that would find it very hard to vote against Russ

Sadly, Professor Ann (and I mean this with the utmost respect), you and people who vote emotionally like are the problem. It was what elected Obama and Pelosi and Reid and look at the shithole you - yes all of you who voted that way are responsible for this - have put America in to.

To you who voted with Ann in 2008:

On behalf of all Americans, especially those with the foresight to realize an imperfect McCain Presidency would not have given us Obamacare, a 10 trillion national debt for the next 5 generations, and a nuclear Iran - thanks for nothing.

The main difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans will usually ask, "What do you think about...?" while Democrats will usually ask, "How do you feel about...?" Barack Obama was the quintessential Democrat candidate because he was all about how he made the voters feel about themselves.

Not mine though. I wrote my rep (Bean) with specific concerns re Obamacare and my almost 20-year-old disabled daughter. She replied with a long winded boilerplate letter (also posted on her website) that did not address any of my concerns at all.

Occasionally Ann makes blog posts that are clearly an attempt to help her generally vitriolic and irrationally outraged audience get past the polarization that their Messiahs at Fox News have choked them with for so many months and years, and when she does so, the denial and paranoid deterrence of such folks is sadly obvious in posts like the sexist "Paul" who attempts to damn the fact that women in general have the right to vote simply because he does not agree with Ann on one particular point, which to him and others who this blog generally attract makes her an impure Republican and probably a "RINO."

I bet Ann sits at home rolling her eyes and shaking her head at how bigoted and idiotic most of her readers are, especially when it shows in posts like these.

I don't care if a candidate eats puppies, if he's gonna reduce spending and the scope of government, then he'll get my vote. Our house is on fire. I just want to know if you're bringing water. I don't care what else you did, who you love or what kinda house you live in. Put the damned fire out.

Too many people don't realize how bad the fire is - how it may already be beyond control. They think it's not that bad, and nothing new. They are wrong. I don't think we can prevent disaster, because we just don't have the will, but I hope we try.

Any reduction will help, and there is the chance that if we release the power of free markets enough, it will surprise us again, with self feeding prosperity that overpowers the gutless tendency to waste human potential by trying to eliminate risk.

Oh, come on now. The ad is effective because it resonates with things we know and have internalized over the years.

I don't understand ... What do you "know" about Feingold that this ad brings out?

Do you really believe that other Democrats shun him? Do you really believe that his policies differ from other Democrats' policies? Do you really believe that Feingold's voting record hasn't contributed to the situation we're in?

For that matter, do you really believe that the Supreme Court was correct in ruling that McCain-Feingold was constitutional?

By which I assume you mean, “Thanks for voting for Pelosi/Reid/Obama’s agenda, because most votes in DC are PARTY LINE Votes. And so no matter what Feingold SAYS about an issue, how he’ll vote is with his caucus and his President.”

And so Feingold voted for Obama Care and the Porkulus Bill? And you, Althouse, think that this ad should sway you to vote for him?

You weren’t insulted Althouse, people are calling you on your “position.” Insulted for your weight, hair colour, ethnicity, and the like is being “insulted”…being told that you are being irrational is not an insult. It might be WRONG, but it’s not an insult, and neither was it “anti-feminist.” I’d say it was foolish to vote for Obama, seemingly regret it, and then turn around and vote for Feingold, on the basis of what he SAYS, whether you were a man or womon.

Oh, I expect you will follow the path of least resistance. Justified by clever rationalizations, of course. The election of 2008 was remarkably entertaining in that regard, so many smart people bullshitting themselves. And because they were so smart they generally succeeded.

I found the ad empty of specifics, it seemed more aimed at emotional manipulation. But the mention of health care did catch my attention. Looks like Russ is going to double down and defend the HCR. He probably hasn't much choice, and maybe he really does think it is a good thing.

hmmm "geezerly"-- so that could not be construed as an ageism term professor? so its OK for you to use a term like that and get the vapours when someone uses the N word or is critical of the 19th amendment?

Well, I'd agree with you, it's an effective ad...and a good reminder of what I, too, respect about him. I'd also add, that it's the same respect that he's even gotten from the conservatives in my own family. To me, that speaks volumes.

Funny, you never (I never) hear any one around here say, "But Herb...Our Herb..."

Senhor Ritmo--I will stipulate that its always best for people to make decisions on things politicians actually do, this post by the professor was at the emotive level (re an ad) versus what Mr Feingold has actually done.

and I think the critical comments have been directed at the emotive basis rather than the rational basis--of course your reading may vary

Perhaps those of you who instinctively make anti-female statements and assume I act directly on pure emotion are yourselves in automatic mode. Look to yourself? Your reaction to me doesn't look terribly contemplative and deeply reasoned.

We're not being "contemplative and deeply reasoned" - we're voting conservative - that's all that matters. Is a vote for Sarah Palin "contemplative and deeply reasoned"? No - she's deeply conservative. Christine O'Donnell? Same thing. Go down the line of Tea Party candidates and you'll find the same thing, over and over:

If they aren't truly conservative they don't get a vote - period.

Enough is enough.

PS

As one Rush listener to another, you know this:

The goal is to win - not to get along with Democrats but to beat them. Everything else is a distraction from the goal:

More than 20 years ago, Meredith Maran falsely accused her father of molestation. That she came to believe such a thing was possible reveals what can happen when personal turmoil meets a powerful social movement. In her book "My Lie: A True Story of False Memory" (the introduction of which is excerpted on Salon), Maran recounts the 1980s feminist-inspired campaign to expose molestation, which hit feverish levels in 1988 with the book 'The Courage to Heal." As an early reporter on the story, Maran observed family therapy sessions, interviewed molesters and steeped herself in cases where abuse clearly took place. Meanwhile, she divorced her husband and fell in love with a woman who was also an incest survivor. Maran began having nightmares about her own molestation and soon what had been a contentious relationship with her father turned into accusations of unspeakable crimes. Eventually, she came to realize the truth. She was the person who had done wrong.

Toward the end of her memoir, her father asks her, "What I really want to know is how the hell you could have thought that of me."

She didn't, Pops, you were just imagining things.

Any man who notices strange behavior by women - like going back on an easily-implemented plan to take back the country - is sexist and delusional. It's you who have the problem.

And hey, Pops, call your former son-in-law and tell him how screwed up he is, too. Then have him call all the other fathers and sons who got swept up in that "1980s feminist-inspired campaign,...which hit feverish levels" resulting in a bunch of wrongly convicted men who are now expected to view them as "goddesses", like Elizabeth Taylor, because she's so beautiful.

Look at how beautiful Liz is - as you sit in jail watching your country being handed to those feminists who put you there.

Madness, I tell you. It's sheer unadulterated madness.

Made even worse because no one - absolutely no one - will admit how far down the rabbit hole we already are.

"We're not being "contemplative and deeply reasoned" - we're voting conservative - that's all that matters."

As my post indicates, I'm fully aware of that option and strongly drawn to it. But I hate to see Russ go down.

He's way behind in the polls now, and there is something really sad about it.

In ordinary times, I would say: I want a mix of people in Congress, conferring with each other in something that has some resonance with the ideal of deliberative democracy. In that coming together, there should be voices from across the ideological spectrum. There need to be liberal voices, and there is no more admirable liberal voice than Russ Feingold's. Weed out the lesser liberals, but leave Russ Feingold.

Perhaps those of you who instinctively make anti-female statements and assume I act directly on pure emotion are yourselves in automatic mode. Look to yourself? Your reaction to me doesn't look terribly contemplative and deeply reasoned.

I can't speak for anyone but myself and I was kidding.

Mostly.

What caught me, though, was the line, "This ad reaches the part of me that would find it very hard to vote against Russ.".

Like it or not, that conveys a message of emotional attachment. Perhaps not to you, but to a good many readers. I just thought it was a nice little set up for some good-natured ribbing.

Perhaps those of you who instinctively make anti-female statements and assume I act directly on pure emotion are yourselves in automatic mode.

It's not a particularly brilliant ad, and most of what it says is balderdash. He hasn't signed on as a co-sponsor for S. 3447, aka the Post-9/11 GI Bill. I guess Iraq and Afghanistan veterans can just go scratch when it comes to post-service education in his eyes. He votes against pay raises that he knows are going to take place regardless of his vote? How courageous!

So when you say that the "ad reaches the part of me that would find it very hard to vote against Russ." Then you close out with "Our Russ ..." italicized, what are we supposed to assume other than that you are responding emotionally to "your Russ."

As my post indicates, I'm fully aware of that option and strongly drawn to it. But I hate to see Russ go down.

There are people in Russia who rejoiced when the USSR fell, but who still kinda missed Comrade Stalin as well. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

In ordinary times, I would say: I want a mix of people in Congress, conferring with each other in something that has some resonance with the ideal of deliberative democracy. In that coming together, there should be voices from across the ideological spectrum. There need to be liberal voices, and there is no more admirable liberal voice than Russ Feingold's. Weed out the lesser liberals, but leave Russ Feingold.

Well, we only replace one-third of our senators each election cycle. I assure you -- whether or not Russ Feingold is re-elected, there will still be plenty of left-wing Democrats in the Senate to make their "liberal voices" heard.

If we could somehow save Russ Feingold but cast out Tom Harkin, Dick Durbin, and Barbara Boxer in exchange, then I might agree with you.

Althouse said: "There need to be liberal voices, and there is no more admirable liberal voice than Russ Feingold's."

I'll agree with you on this much: Feingold has always seemed to be a decent and honorable man, better on that score than many Republicans.

However, I'm not convinced that liberal voices are needed in the House and Senate. I understand the argument: The wisdom of crowds and all that. But where does it end?

To have a diverse deliberative body, do we need to include Communists and Nazis? I think you have to draw a line somewhere.

I agree that we should have a diverse group, spanning the political spectrum from Joe Lieberman on the left, to Inhofe on the right. Anything to the left of Lieberman is dead weight and should be jettisoned.

Unfortunately, that includes some decent, honorable people, whose only flaw is the fact that they think that the government actually owns everything, and that we're entitled only to what the government decides to leave us.

We went through that with you before with Obama. You were told by a large number of your commenters to look at what he did rather than what he said and you went all "pragmatic" on us and voted for Zero. Now you sound as if you are doing the same thing all over again. Maybe he did do a couple of things you support but it was his support for Reid and Pelosi and Obama that got us into this mess we are in now and you look as if you are going to vote for the same crew all over again. You can say you aren't but the signs are out there all over the place. When are the academics going to start looking at what people do rather than what they say. It is those who listen rather than actually look at the reality who vote this same way. "I don't like what this admin is doing but MY congressman or MY senator is not part of the problem" and that is even after he has voted right along with them most of the time. You are just trying to fool yourself and fool your readers by not admitting it.

I disagree w/ many, probably most, of Feingold's votes. But, he's honest and real. Remember, during the Clinton impeachment he was the lone Dem to vote that THERE BE EVIDENCE HEARD. He got a lot of shit for that, as he has for other votes. Feingold always gets my vote.

Liberalism is a LIE...those that espouse it know it...but it makes them feel so damn good to call themselves a liberal. obama has fully exposed it for the CANCER it is and radiation starts in November...sorry althouse...the country can no longer afford your "feelings" for russ and the like...

Hard not to vote for one of the most ethical and independent members of congress. To vote for panders who mouth a few conservative slogans but look cute seems to be the dominate emotion expressed by males on this blog-- I'll take Althouse's side on this one.

None of these clever ads will matter come November because the Democrats will still suffer a resounding defeat.

Just look at the top of the ticket in Wisconsin. There is no way that Walker gets less than 60 percent of the vote in Milwaukee County. He's the current County Executive and has handily won three elections in a Democrat dominated county. He's "their Scott" which means he will win the governorship by a large margin. And Walker's strength/coattails in Milwaukee County means that Ron Johnson will beat Feingold. Worse yet if those voters choose a straight Republican ticket.

In the last 30 statewide races, no one has lost when they secured 60 percent of the Milwaukee County vote.

Personally, after my experiences with Feingold during two health care forums in Racine County this last winter, I can't wait to see him defeated.

Loyalty to a Russ Feingold for occasionally speaking against a Democrat myth is pretty weak. Remember he always manages to vote for our destruction when he is not grandstanding as a thinking man. He dresses up in a false flag clothes when he acts as if he is an independent thinker. In the end he only joins our enemies for the cash. Let him go.

Right Ann. So your emotional sympathies are going to lend themselves for voting to continue the perpetual incompetence and fecklessness that has housed itself in the Senate. Female, she is fickle. Sometimes confused.

Part of the appeal of Buckley is his understanding, and mockery, of the fact that people vote irrationally in many cases, and there is not a damn thing he, as great as he was, or us, could (can) do about it.

The back of WFB's book The Unmaking of a Mayor about his NY Mayoral campaign is entirely a testament to this fact, and he points out time and time again in his columns the same lame Democrat slurs about the rich and taxes and Republicans hating children et. al. will never cease, and are sadly effective.

Especially in academia, for obvious reasons of (as Buckely called it in On The Firing Line) hubris, "all but unadulterated."

Big Mike cites a very persuasive take down of the ad. It you listen closed to it, the ad is a fraud - he does some stuff to support veterans, so some unidentified veterans support him; he does some stuff to try to keep jobs (apparently unsuccessfully), so some other unidentified people support him.

Then the culmination of the add is the lunch table fraud. He claims his pay raise bill alienated him from others, yet the bill was passed unanimously.

I have never understood Fiengold's appeal. He simply votes hard left virtually every time. Yet, he somehow manages to creat this maverick type image that even Ann falls for. From this ad, it seems to be masterful manipulation.

I think he is exactly the kind of long time liberal politician that needs to be beaten this time.

"The first annual YearlyKos convention is scheduled for June 8-11, 2006 in Las Vegas. The convention is designed to bring together the liberal community which has grown around the influential DailyKos blog, which has over 350,000 members and receives more than 4 million unique reader visits each week.

The more I think about it, the worse this add seems. Feingold has been in the senate for 18 yers and he has nothing really to say about it in terms of accomplishments? He no doubt is a smart guy who knows the add is manipulation, yet Ann likes him for it? I don't expect much from politicians, but someone like Feingold, who claims to be a maverick or different because his purported honesty, should bring something real to his ads.

I imagine Feingold is a difficult guy to get along with, who has managed to present a different persona. It is clever but further damaging to Feingold in my eyes that he artfully uses the "same house" bit in his commercial, when his wife is no longer there.

Kansas City said: "Feingold has been in the senate for 18 yers and he has nothing really to say about it in terms of accomplishments?"

That's because - his claims of independence notwithstanding - Feingold is a party line voter, and his votes over the past 2 years in particular are deeply unpopular.

So like the slight of hand artist that he is, he manufactures a maverick-y, populist image of himself to distract inattentive voters from what has really been doing all along - voting for bigger government, higher taxes, and more federal control over our lives.

I say let him continue to dine alone - just not in the Senate Dining Room.